IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] draft-ietf-v6ops-balanced-ipv6-security WGLC

Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se> Wed, 13 November 2013 09:33 UTC

Return-Path: <swmike@swm.pp.se>
X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 83E6821F9D0E for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 13 Nov 2013 01:33:17 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.581
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.581 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.018, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id wvrpD9aeQpW5 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 13 Nov 2013 01:33:17 -0800 (PST)
Received: from uplift.swm.pp.se (ipv6.swm.pp.se [IPv6:2a00:801::f]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E18C321F9CF7 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Wed, 13 Nov 2013 01:33:16 -0800 (PST)
Received: by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix, from userid 501) id D6A39A1; Wed, 13 Nov 2013 10:33:15 +0100 (CET)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id D03A09A; Wed, 13 Nov 2013 10:33:15 +0100 (CET)
Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2013 10:33:15 +0100
From: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>
To: Marc Lampo <marc.lampo.ietf@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAB0C4xN88WMwKN5+VE5ZupWmCnYQGAuFPPFqQ+Vx+g_+c=z9HQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1311131032150.26054@uplift.swm.pp.se>
References: <201311101900.rAAJ0AR6025350@irp-view13.cisco.com> <CAB0C4xOfz_JAjEEJZ-Zz7MBEyZhVzrAE+8Ghf1ggC3+9pyHmNg@mail.gmail.com> <989B8ED6-273E-45D4-BFD8-66A1793A1C9F@cisco.com> <52833B8F.10708@lanparty.ee> <CAB0C4xN88WMwKN5+VE5ZupWmCnYQGAuFPPFqQ+Vx+g_+c=z9HQ@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.02 (DEB 1266 2009-07-14)
Organization: People's Front Against WWW
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"
Cc: v6ops@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [v6ops] draft-ietf-v6ops-balanced-ipv6-security WGLC
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: v6ops discussion list <v6ops.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/v6ops>
List-Post: <mailto:v6ops@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2013 09:33:17 -0000

On Wed, 13 Nov 2013, Marc Lampo wrote:

> but is "IPv6 end2end mentality" a good idea, from the security point of 
> view ?  I don't think so.

Making things not work is very secure, but not very useful.

What is your proposal for tradeoff between these two factors?

-- 
Mikael Abrahamsson    email: swmike@swm.pp.se

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email